| Message ID | 20240625150717.1038212-6-olivier.moysan@foss.st.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | iio: adc: dfsdm: add scaling support | expand |
On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 05:07:13PM +0200, Olivier Moysan wrote: > Add documentation of device tree bindings to support > sigma delta modulator backend in IIO framework. > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@foss.st.com> I don't review bindings for a job, I can only reliably get to look at my mail queue in the evenings, please give me a chance to reply to you before you submit a new version. > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/iio/adc/sd-modulator-backend.yaml# > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > + > +title: Sigma delta modulator backend Same comments about filename and title apply here as the previous version. "TI $foo Sigma Delta Modulator" and drop the reference to back ends or the pretence of being generic. Thanks, Conor.
Hi Conor, On 6/25/24 17:34, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 05:07:13PM +0200, Olivier Moysan wrote: >> Add documentation of device tree bindings to support >> sigma delta modulator backend in IIO framework. >> >> Signed-off-by: Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@foss.st.com> > > I don't review bindings for a job, I can only reliably get to look at > my mail queue in the evenings, please give me a chance to reply to you > before you submit a new version. > Sorry, the short review delay. >> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/iio/adc/sd-modulator-backend.yaml# >> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >> + >> +title: Sigma delta modulator backend > > Same comments about filename and title apply here as the previous > version. "TI $foo Sigma Delta Modulator" and drop the reference to back > ends or the pretence of being generic. > The logic here is the same as for the former sigma delta modulator driver. (see discussion [1]) I mean introducing a generic and minimalist driver to support sd modulators, but not dedicated to a specific modulator. The ads1201 is chosen as a basic modulator here. But it is rather an arbitrary choice. I agree "backend" reference is not really relevant here. I have to think about a way to manage the coexistence of this sigma delta modulator driver with its former version. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/6943aaf5-b580-0fd1-7a2e-b99f7a266388@st.com/ BRs Olivier > Thanks, > Conor.
On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 06:40:58PM +0200, Olivier MOYSAN wrote: > Hi Conor, > > On 6/25/24 17:34, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 05:07:13PM +0200, Olivier Moysan wrote: > > > Add documentation of device tree bindings to support > > > sigma delta modulator backend in IIO framework. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@foss.st.com> > > > > I don't review bindings for a job, I can only reliably get to look at > > my mail queue in the evenings, please give me a chance to reply to you > > before you submit a new version. > > > > Sorry, the short review delay. > > > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/iio/adc/sd-modulator-backend.yaml# > > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > > + > > > +title: Sigma delta modulator backend > > > > Same comments about filename and title apply here as the previous > > version. "TI $foo Sigma Delta Modulator" and drop the reference to back > > ends or the pretence of being generic. > > > > The logic here is the same as for the former sigma delta modulator driver. > (see discussion [1]) > I mean introducing a generic and minimalist driver to support sd modulators, > but not dedicated to a specific modulator. The ads1201 is chosen as a basic > modulator here. But it is rather an arbitrary choice. > > I agree "backend" reference is not really relevant here. I have to think > about a way to manage the coexistence of this sigma delta modulator driver > with its former version. To be blunt, I don't care about drivers! Well I do, but not in this particular context. You can absolutely have a driver that supports multiple backends or sigma delta modulators, but right now we are talking about a binding and this binding supports exactly one sigma delta modulator - and with an explicit compatible. In that context, presenting the binding as generic makes little sense. > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/6943aaf5-b580-0fd1-7a2e-b99f7a266388@st.com/ Looking at this though, I question the binding more... The programming model of the device is identical as a backend or otherwise, so it shouldn't be getting a new compatible. Isn't this actually as simple as adding #io-backend-cells to the existing binding and using that to determine whether the device is being used as a backend or in isolation? Thanks, Conor.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/sd-modulator-backend.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/sd-modulator-backend.yaml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..3299db71f79d --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/sd-modulator-backend.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/iio/adc/sd-modulator-backend.yaml# +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# + +title: Sigma delta modulator backend + +maintainers: + - Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@foss.st.com> + +properties: + compatible: + enum: + - ti,ads1201 + + '#io-backend-cells': + const: 0 + + reg: + maxItems: 1 + + vref-supply: + description: Phandle to the vref input analog reference voltage. + +required: + - compatible + - '#io-backend-cells' + +additionalProperties: false + +examples: + - | + ads1201: adc { + compatible = "ti,ads1201"; + #io-backend-cells = <0>; + }; + +...
Add documentation of device tree bindings to support sigma delta modulator backend in IIO framework. Signed-off-by: Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@foss.st.com> --- .../iio/adc/sd-modulator-backend.yaml | 39 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/sd-modulator-backend.yaml